Bishop Hill Shameless
Feb 22, 2013 Energy: gas Get a load of this nonsense from a week or so ago: campaigners against fuel poverty trying to prevent the one thing that might bring energy prices down - concentrating on gas.
"Renewable energy would be cheaper but they're refusing to make that transition because their profits depend on gas."...
Elizabeth Ziga, from Fuel Poverty Action, said: "While we freeze in our homes and millions of us choose between heating and eating, the Government is snugly in bed with the big six energy companies.
"Hand in hand, they're plotting to increase our dependence on dirty and expensive gas power, which will mean even higher fuel bills as well as rising food prices due to climate change.
It's a bit of an indictment of the education of these kids that they can't work out that if renewables genuinely were cheaper they would not require a subsidies, feed-in-tariffs and renewables obligations. I really isn't rocket science.
Wait a minute. It turns out that Fuel Poverty Action is a project of the Climate Justice Collective. They are campaigning against the results of their own policy demands.
OK, uneducatable then.
Reader Comments (54)
Are these guys thick, ideologically blinkered, hypocrites or all three?
What a bunch of numpties.
Yes it is silly nonsense. They have been programmed like children to hate the oil companies because of AGW.
However, in this case they are right. Energy prices are increasing because the criminal oil companies are indeed running a cartel and no one is stopping them.
In America, cheap gas was an article of faith for voters. That's what kept global oil prices down. Now, with global warming as an excuse, prices keep rising. Nobody is stopping them.
I did point this out to one of their number and was rewarded with the statement that I am a "dick-head" and that my use of "genuine scientific sites on google" shows what an ignoramus I am. As I am obviously too stupid to understand the logic of that last statement I desisted. The brainwashed individual was about 30 and simply spouted the mantra of droughts, hurricanes, sea level rise etc and when I indicated the NOAA SOTC that essentially refutes all of that garbage his response was a simple verbal onslaught of invective. I know his name but will not give it as he is a relation, but he was educated in oregon state university.
Muppetry at the highest of levels!!! How do they sleep at night, oh probably because they are the recipients of taxpayers money somewhere down the line on a "nice little earner"!
I hate the way the BBC and the obedient media, which includes the Huffpo, give the term "anti-poverty campaigner" to people who are clearly campaigning for more poverty. Actually I also hate the way the word "poverty" has been redefined -it now means nothing to do with being poor and is entirely about income inequality. Thus we get nonesnse about their being more "poverty" in Britain than North Korea because in NK everybody is straving so they arer all (well almost all) equally out of "poverty".
Only thjose campaigning for growth, which excludes the LabNatConDemGreens, can honestly be called an antipoverty campiagner.
Struan Stevenson MEP has just warned that building useless windmills will see energy bills rise to £3,500 per annum.
I wasn't surprised to see him called a 'climate change denier' etc by the clueless.
Over at wiki they say that he's as bad as you Bish. ( they didn't even know how to spell your name correctly )..
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Struan_Stevenson
Most of these people are so puffed up with their own sense of self-importance and self-righteousness that they wouldn't recognise a fact if it threw up all over them.
Those of us old enough to remember when natural gas replaced town gas, will remember that we were told how clean natural gas was compared to town gas. In fact it was so clean that they had to add smell to it so that people who turned their gas on without lighting it wouldn't kill themselves. Suddenly natural gas has become dirty. Now we are also supposed to use clean electricity instead of the dirty electricity that we used to use, tho I haven't yet discovered the difference.
The newspeak of 1984 has arrived, as predicted by Orwell.
But then climate change morphed from CAGW, is predicated on the idea that man is warming the planet AND that warming is becoming uncontrollable.
At the same time, alarmists blame cold winters on 'climate change' - warming=cold.
Shameless alarmism, can argue whatever it wants and so do politicians and advocate kooks - climate justice collective.
Religious zealots do not care about the science or rational thinking. They will even live with fundamental conflicts in their actions and explain this as "god works in mysterious ways" (climate works in an chaotic way). The "end justifies the means".
Fossil fuels are evil and it doesn't matter what evidence there is, it is all lies and there is only one "truth"! We will all going to die if we do not give up that nasty technology. After all what has technology ever done for us! (apologies to "The Life of Brian").
The whole cAGW scam is falling apart. Even the chairman of the IPCC (a railway engineer) has now been forced to ackowledge the 17 year hiatus in warming. The greens are fighting for their very existence and they know it. They put all their chips on global warming and the data is slowly revealing them for the liars that they are. Once the public and, more importantly, those who have been donating to the likes of Greenpeace and FoE in good faith, wake up to the scale of lying the greens are finished. The internet has a long memory and they won't be allowed to forget.
This is why the green propaganda machine is in overdrive. They are running out of time in which to get legislation through before they disappear.
Do FPA / CJC rely solely upon wind/solar generation for all their operations; or, are they hypocrites?
I note they've organised some "protest" gatherings. How many attendees will walk/cycle to the venues; and how many will depend upon energy-consuming, CO2-producing, modes of transport?
According to their web site, of price rises sine 2005, "84% was un-related to low-carbon measures".
Somehow they fail to see that 16% was related to low carbin measures.
Wouldn't a 16% lower price rise be useful to those in fuel poverty?
P.S. They only have two responses on this page, both from sceptics.
@ Phillip Bratby Feb 22, 2013 at 11:40 AM
"In fact (natural gas) was so clean that they had to add smell to it so that people who turned their gas on without lighting it wouldn't kill themselves."
The products of combustion of natural gas are broadly similar to the exhalation from CAGW proponents. CO2 + Water Vapour.
There are plenty of clues about education @ the Early Bird's site, invisibleserfscollar.com
====================
"Renewable energy would be cheaper but they're refusing to make that transition because their profits depend on gas."...
This reminds me of some of the lefty nonsense I heard people churn out 40 years ago at university. I have no doubt the Climate Justice Collective runs along much the same tracks.
These must be the same morons as were on the Vicky Pryce jury!
This is disgusting. She gets it entirely backwards. Since this is both simple and her speciality I find it hard to blame simple incompetence. Just another careerist looking after her own interests.
I hope real poverty campaigners pull her up on it but it takes brave individuals to put the brakes on the anti-carbon gravy train.
I'm fairly certain that the 16% figure from their website neglects the obstruction of affordable gas from fracking by anti-carbon zealots. Also, the rises in food prices are not from climate change but from - you guessed it - fools like this woman feeding food to cars.
I see Bloomberg New Energy Finance are at it again, this time downplaying the possible benefits from shale gas
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/energy/oilandgas/9886981/UK-shale-gas-revolution-is-wishful-thinking.html
The DT also has a report that Sottish landowners stand to make £1 billion in rental income from wind farms - that'll help solve poverty, I'm sure.
Off topic but this channel is updated daily and gives us space weather and earthquake reports:
http://www.youtube.com/user/Suspicious0bservers?feature=watch
They are not stupid, but evil.
They are French Turners. Get an education yourself.
Re: Feb 22, 2013 at 11:32 AM George
I've update Wiki, removing the final sentence text regarding denialism, and the link to the un-citable broken web page,
I wonder if any of those people were on the Vicky Pryce jury? They appear to have a similar level of intelect and understanding of common sense.
DaveS, The DT also has a report that Sottish landowners stand to make £1 billion in rental income from wind farms - that'll help solve poverty, I'm sure.
Scotland has form there... they were called the Highland Clearances. This is not disimilar, the SNP will somehow manage to blame the English Parliament when it is shown to be a mistake.
Jiminy Cricket,
I thought that it was part of Salmond's plan for an independent Scotland to have lots of windmills and England would be forced to buy the renewable energy produced to stay within its emissions quotas.
Many a slip 'twixt cup and lip.
"Renewable energy would be cheaper but they're refusing to make that transition because their profits depend on gas."...
Leftist mindset in one, that 'they' are in control and nothing will ever change (unless the workers, intellectuals and peasants of Tooting Bec come together in collective action etc etc etc bloody etc).
Where do these people, given their vision of an immutable world, think the Bill Gates', Steve Jobs, Bransons and Dysons have come from? Do they not understand that if there actually were anything in renewable energy the bright and the greedy would be piling in, and British Gas, Scottish Power, Eon et al would swiftly be consigned to the dustbin of history?
Disko Troop, your relative was not "educated" at Oregon State University - he just wasted time living in Corvallis.
All three, no doubt at all. Just watch these clowns shooting themselves in the foot if you can stand the embarrassment - http://industrialprogress.net/2013/02/19/350-org-tries-to-intimidate-me/
I've described the counterparts of these fools in America as "just more victims of the American educational system out parading their hard-earned ignorance around for all to see."
If these people think that green power is cheaper, there is a very simple response. Let them elect to pay for there electricity bills at the renewables tariff. We will then have to pay for that high polluting high priced gas, coal and nasty nuclear energy. But we don't mind if it makes them feel better.
Look on the bright side. If we have long power cuts to look forward to in the future then even if they do not actually affect "global warming" they will make "Internet addiction" less of a problem!
They probably get grants for both!
Even in this day of political correctness (is that marxist indoctrination?) the word retard has a use.
Feb 22, 2013 at 1:15 PM | John Silver
Thanks for the education!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entryism
Feb 22, 2013 at 4:33 PM | John in France
http://industrialprogress.net/2013/02/19/350-org-tries-to-intimidate-me/
I notice the 350.org people in your provided video clips like their Canon SLR cameras, iPhones etc so two of Don Keiller's categories deinitely fit: ideologically blinkered and hypocrites. They can't be that thick, you have to know a bit even to want a good Canon camera. All paid for by the fools that fund them.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/businessandecology/energyefficiency/9888309/Theres-an-easy-way-to-keep-our-lights-on.html
I don,t know what you are all worry about? Surely you should be happy that there is no problem.
@Colin Porter - a great idea! let the power companies offer an "ethical" tariff for the Zeds, Hengists and BBDs of the planet. and let there be an economic tariff for everyone else. Win Win
The Climate Alarmists cynically stealing our Denier Fuel Poverty Thunder.
Wasting our taxes on useless Alarmist Windmills that caused the Fuel Poverty in the first place when it could be better spent on renewing our Nuke power stations for our nations infrastructure.
The whole Climate Change fad took of when Chernobyl blew up.Manufactured scare story to get the public to accept nuclear power. Now new UK Nuclear Reactors to combat Climate Change bring it on.
The French and Japanese Nuclear industry puts the German and British wind turbine industry out of business .
Hollow victory for the Climate Change Justice Collective.But Everyone else can turn their central back on.
Why the **** should we pay for this bonkers save Gaia [from us?] rubbish - the climate is bloody well cooling.
Quite honestly, I don't give a stuff about global warming - it is a crock.
It is when the green loons insist on making me pay for the numbskull ideas. The green agenda has been designed by men and women who are deliberately striving to close industrial Britain down - they haven't thought it through though, quite naturally and what a surprise that is - what, how and who will power their laptops and fund their far too well paid jobs - when Britain shuts down for good?
I've posited this idea before, let the greens have their own energy company but allow the remaining energy companies to source and provide electricity how they like...... and then the hairshirt green loony brigade - can buy all the green energy they want.
The end for green mania is coming, their shrieks of panic and cries are growing ever more shrill but it is not over yet.
"This is why the green propaganda machine is in overdrive. They are running out of time in which to get legislation through before they disappear."
The radical baby boomers?
"uneducatable"?? Uneducable, please.
If you increase rainfall, carbon dioxide and extend the growing season with warmer temperatures plants grow better and there is more food. (If only it was true! Such a pity about the maths really.)
If you subvert land usage to grow bio-fuel and plant windmills there is less food.
Man started off inventing religion and sacrificing food and possessions in the belief that his actions and suffering somehow controlled the weather and the seasons. He had less food but had appeased the gods. Nothing much changes really. It took a long time for society to grudgingly accept scientific explanations of physical weather and climate and now the dear old met office, institute of physics and the nupty in the article above, are leading us back to the good old days where our hair shirts were good for our morals and our observance of superstitions the best way of explaining and avoiding bad weather and the wrath of the gods.
Colin Porter and Diogenes,
I have said before that the greens should be allowed to have their energy for free but they have can only have the renewable bit. A month trying to cope with the risible and intermittent supply from windmills would be enough for most of them. As I write, wind is porducing just over 1 GW or <20% of installed capacity.
Hi All.
Sorry about this, it is is very O/T. I've just been reading Donna Laframboise's blog. Is this what the 'horse dna in beef' scandal is really all about?
http://nofrakkingconsensus.com/2013/02/19/the-uns-food-police/
Cheers.
NicG.
Steve Jones said:
... the greens should be allowed to have their energy for free but they have can only have the renewable bit. A month trying to cope with the risible and intermittent supply from windmills would be enough for most of them.
I wonder if such an outcome could be arranged using smart meters? If so, there would be something to be said in favour of replacing all the existing meters!
The propaganda pushed by these loons is reminiscent of 1930's Germany and the Nazi rubbish that was believed by many. It seems that this dreadful episode of history is a lesson forgotten.
retireddave (Feb 22, 2013 at 10:28 PM) -
The Telegraph article to which you linked rather off-handedly dismisses wind as a saviour: Successive governments have "put excessive faith in nuclear power and onshore wind".
John Marshall, I blame some of that forgetfulness on those of a certain ideology crying triumphantly 'Godwin' when the discussion turns toward authoritarianism. It's been made tabu to bring the subject up.
==================
Extremists do not care about direct conflicts of interest or reality.
It is not at all surprising that professional climate kooks like fuel (fool?) poverty and their sponsor Climate (in)justice are in diametric conflict.
They rely on shaking down governments and the wealthy to promote lucrative nonsense. The rest is just detail.
Even the chairman of the IPCC (a railway engineer) has now been forced to ackowledge the 17 year hiatus in warming.
Feb 22, 2013 at 11:58 AM | Steve Jones
I was interested to read that the distinguished sceptic scientist Dr. Roy Spencer regards the claim that warming ended in 1997/8 as poor science.
He is discussing the effect of tropical sea temperatures on warming here
http://www.drroyspencer.com/2013/02/tropical-ssts-since-1998-latest-climate-models-warm-3x-too-fast/
He replies to a comment dated Feb 21st at 4.16pm as follows. Note his last paragraph.
"MEI is based upon spatial patterns in a variety of measures in the Pacific, clouds, SST, etc. It’s a good statistical measure of the strength of El Nino or La Nina conditions.
It is also, as I (and others) have shown, highly correlated to year-to-year variations in *tropical-average* temperatures.
So, it makes sense to use MEI as a surrogate for the MEI-related temperature changes in order to better isolate any underlying trends.
I think it is certainly better than saying “it hasn’t warmed in 16 years”, when we know very well that the start of that 16 year period was a very warm El Nino event."